Clinical comparison of humeral-lateralization reverse total shoulder arthroplasty between patients with irreparable rotator cuff tear and patients with cuff tear arthropathy

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for massive rotator cuff tears without glenohumeral arthritis can improve clinical outcomes despite history of prior rotator cuff repair: A systematic review

IMPORTANCE

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is often used to surgically address massive irreparable rotator cuff tears (MIRCT) without arthritis. The impact of prior attempted rotator cuff repair (RCR) on outcomes is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic review was to compare functional outcomes, range of motion, and complications in patients with a MIRCT without arthritis who underwent RSA as a primary procedure versus after prior RCR.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

A systematic review was performed on RSA for a MIRCT. The search was conducted from February to March of 2022 using the MEDLINE database. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROs), range of motion (ROM), and complications were extracted. These outcomes were weighted and analysed based on whether the reverse was performed as the primary procedure or following a prior RCR.

FINDINGS

Seven studies were included in the analysis, consisting of 343 cases in the primary RSA group and 95 cases in the prior RCR group, with a mean follow-up of 40.8 months. There were no demographic differences between cohorts. Postoperative PROs and ROM were comparable between groups, although the prior RCR group had a higher maximal percentage of improvement (MPI%) for the Constant-Murley Score and Simple Shoulder Test. There was a higher risk for complications (relative risk [RR] 6.26) and revisions (RR 3.91) in the prior RCR group. The most common complications were acromial stress fractures and prosthetic dislocation.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

Patients undergoing RSA for MIRCT following a prior RCR have functional outcomes that are largely comparable to those who have a primary RSA, but they may be at higher risk of complications and revision.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis: significantly different characteristics and outcomes in shoulders with intact vs. torn rotator cuff

PURPOSE

To compare outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for primary osteoarthritis (OA) with and without rotator cuff (RC) tears to those with secondary OA due to RC tears.

METHODS

We reviewed records of all patients who received RSA for primary OA or secondary OA. All patients had preoperative radiographs, computed tomographic arthrography (CTA), and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of their shoulders to assess their etiology, glenoid morphology, and fatty infiltration. Pre- and postoperative (at minimum follow-up of 2 years) Constant scores and range of motion were compared between patients who had RSA for primary OA with and without RC tears to those with secondary OA due to RC tears.

RESULTS

Of the initial cohort of 605 shoulders (583 patients), 153 were lost to follow-up (25.3%), 25 required revision with implant removal (4.1%), and 13 died of causes unrelated to the surgery (2.1%), and left a final cohort of 414 patients. Of the final cohort, 97 had primary OA with intact RC, 62 had primary OA with RC tears, and 255 had secondary OA. Postoperative Constant scores were significantly higher for primary OA with intact RC (73.8 ± 14.3), compared with both primary OA with RC tears (66.1 ± 14.6, P < .001) and secondary OA (64.1 ± 14.8, P < .001). There were no differences in pre- or postoperative scores between primary OA with RC tears and secondary OA.

CONCLUSION

At 2 or more years following RSA, Constant scores were significantly higher for primary OA with intact RC, compared to either primary OA with RC tears or secondary OA, whereas there were no differences in pre- or postoperative scores of shoulders that had primary OA with RC tears vs. secondary OA. The authors recommend distinguishing primary OA with intact RC from primary OA with RC tears, as the two have considerably different characteristics and prognosis following RSA.

The association between humeral lengthening and clinical outcomes after reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between humeral lengthening and clinical outcomes after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) with stratification based on measurement method and implant design.

METHODS

This systematic review was performed using PRISMA-P guidelines. PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Trials, and Embase were queried for articles evaluating the relationship between humeral lengthening and clinical outcomes inclusive of range of motion (ROM), strength, outcome scores, and pertinent complications (acromial and scapular spine fractures, nerve injury) after RSA. The relationship between humeral lengthening and clinical outcomes was reported descriptively overall and stratified by measurement method and implant design (globally medialized vs. lateralized). A positive association was defined as increased humeral lengthening being associated with greater ROM, outcome scores, or a greater incidence of complications, whereas a negative association denoted that increased humeral lengthening was associated with poorer ROM, outcome scores, or a lower incidence of complications. Meta-analysis was performed to compare humeral lengthening between patients with and without fractures of the acromion or scapular spine.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were included. Humeral lengthening was assessed as the acromiohumeral distance (AHD), the distance from the acromion to the greater tuberosity (AGT), the acromion to the deltoid tuberosity (ADT), and the acromion to the distal humerus (ADH). Of 11 studies that assessed forward elevation, a positive association with humeral lengthening was found in 6, a negative association was found in 1, and 4 studies reported no association. Of studies assessing internal rotation (n = 9), external rotation (n = 7), and abduction (n = 4), all either identified a positive or lack of association with humeral lengthening. Studies assessing outcome scores (n = 11) found either a positive (n = 5) or no (n = 6) association with humeral lengthening. Of the studies that assessed fractures of the acromion and/or scapular spine (n = 6), 2 identified a positive association with humeral lengthening, 1 identified a negative association, and 3 identified no association. The single study that assessed the incidence of nerve injury identified a positive association with humeral lengthening. Meta-analysis was possible for AGT (n = 2) and AHD (n = 2); greater humeral lengthening was found in patients with fractures for studies using the AGT (mean difference 4.5 mm, 95% CI 0.7-8.3) but not the AHD. Limited study inclusion and heterogeneity prohibited identification of trends based on method of measuring humeral lengthening and implant design.

CONCLUSION

The relationship between humeral lengthening and clinical outcomes after RSA remains unclear and requires future investigation using a standardized assessment method.

Patients undergoing anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty achieve clinically significant outcomes faster than those undergoing reverse shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Clinically significant outcome (CSO) benchmarks have been previously established for outcome assessment after total shoulder arthroplasty. However, the time required to achieve CSO improvement is not well understood. The purpose of this study was to (1) determine the time-dependent achievement of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) in patients undergoing either anatomic total shoulder (TSA) or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) and compare the results of the 2 populations and (2) identify variables associated with earlier or delayed achievement of each CSO.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained institutional registry was retrospectively queried for all patients receiving a primary TSA or RTSA between September 2, 2016-October 31, 2017. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) was administered to all patients preoperatively and at standardized postoperative time periods: 5-7 months (6-month time point), 11-13 months (1-year time point), and 23-25 months (2-year time point). Cumulative percentages of CSO achievement were calculated using Kaplan-Meier survival curve analysis with interval censoring. A Weibull parametric survival regression analysis was used to investigate the influence of demographic and clinical variables on delayed or earlier CSO achievement.

RESULTS

A total of 153 patients (157 shoulders) undergoing TSA (n = 76) and RTSA (n = 81) were included in the study population. The RTSA cohort was older (70.2 ± 7.5 vs. 61.0 ± 8.4, P < .001), had a lower BMI (28.8 ± 5.9 vs. 31.5 ± 6.5, P = .006), and a greater proportion of females (53.1% vs. 32.9%, P = .017) relative to TSA. For SCB, there was a significant difference in the cumulative percentage of TSA and RTSA patients reaching this threshold at both the 6-month (77.3% vs. 59.0%, P = .024) and 2-year (92.0% vs. 79.5%, P = .048) time periods, with similar findings demonstrated for PASS. There was a significant difference in the average time required to achieve the PASS (TSA: 6.1 months vs. rTSA: 11.6 months, P = .009), but not the MCID (P = .407) or SCB (P = .153). Factors significantly associated with earlier achievement of more than 1 of the CSO benchmarks were regular preoperative physical exercise and diagnosis of rotator cuff tear without osteoarthritis.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing RTSA had lower rates of achieving SCB and PASS at both 6 months and 2 years compared to patients undergoing TSA. Patients undergoing RTSA on average required nearly double the time to achieve PASS compared with those undergoing TSA. In both groups, clinically significant improvement continued for the entire 2-year duration of study follow-up.

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for irreparable rotator cuff tears without arthritis: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Indications for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) have expanded over recent years. Whilst cuff tear arthropathy is an accepted indication, the results of its use in those without arthritis is not clear. The aim of this article is to review the literature on RTSA for massive rotator cuff tears without associated arthritis.

METHODS

A systematic review search was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to find all studies with clinical outcomes on RTSA performed for massive irreparable rotator cuff tears (MIRCT) without arthritis.

RESULTS

Of the 160 studies produced by the search, a detailed analysis found 11 articles to be included in this review. There was variability in the implant style used and the outcome measures utilised, but all studies found improvement in the outcome following RTSA. Many studies advised judicious use following high complication rates, and caution was advised in those patients with pre-operatively preserved active forward elevation.

CONCLUSION

The available evidence suggests that RTSA is a reliable option in older patients with persistent pain and lack of function following MIRCT even without arthritis. However, as outcomes are not significantly worse following failed rotator cuff repair, joint preserving options in the younger age group should be carefully considered in light of the relatively high complication rate associated with RTSA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.